Hiram W. Evans, The Klan's Fight for Americanism (1926) The backlash against "alien" groups "infesting" American life after World War I assumed its most virulent form in a revival of the Ku Klux Klan. The organization had first emerged in the rural South after the Civil War, seeking to intimidate blacks from voting or holding office, and had pretty much died out by 1900. The zealous patriotism fostered by American intervention in World War I helped revive the Klan. In its new form it was more of an urban than a rural phenomenon. It adopted a broader agenda than the original organization, and its membership grew across the nation. By 1926 it boasted over 3 million members. Klan intolerance now went beyond blacks to include Jews, Catholics, Communists, and labor unionists. Texas dentist Hiram Evans assumed leadership of the organization in 1926. In this speech he reveals that the Klan was fundamentally a protest against all of the ills associated with modern culture. . . . The Klan, therefore, has now come to speak for the great mass of Americans of the old pioneer stock. We believe that it does fairly and faithfully represent them, and our proof lies in their support. To understand the Klan, then, it is necessary to understand the character and present mind of the mass of old-stock Americans. The mass, it must be remembered, as distinguished from the intellectually mongrelized "Liberals." These are, in the first place, a blend of various peoples of the so-called Nordic race, the race which, with all its faults, has given the world almost the whole of modern civilization. The Klan does not try to represent any people but these. . . . These Nordic Americans for the last generation have found themselves increasingly uncomfortable, and finally deeply distressed. There appeared first confusion in thought and opinion, a groping and hesitancy about national affairs and private life alike, in sharp contrast to the clear, straightforward purposes of our earlier years. There was futility in religion, too, which was in many ways even more distressing. Presently we began to find that we were dealing with strange ideas; policies that always sounded well but somehow always made us still more uncomfortable. Finally came the moral breakdown that has been going on for two decades. One by one all our traditional moral standards went by the boards or were so disregarded that they ceased to be binding. The sacredness of our Sabbath, of our homes, of chastity, and finally even of our right to teach our own children in our own schools fundamental facts and truths were torn away from us. Those who maintained the old standards did so only in the face of constant ridicule. . . . The old-stock Americans are learning, however. They have begun to arm themselves for this new type of warfare. Most important, they have broken away from the fetters of the false ideals and philanthropy which put aliens ahead of their own children and their own race. . . . One more point about the present attitude of the old-stock American: he has revived and increased his long-standing distrust of the Roman Catholic Church. It is for this that the native [born] Americans, and the Klan as their leader, are most often denounced as intolerant and prejudiced. . . . The Ku Klux Klan, in short, is an organization which gives expression, direction and purpose to the most vital instincts, hopes, and resentments of the old-stock Americans, provides them with leadership, and is enlisting and preparing them for militant, constructive action toward fulfilling their racial and national destiny. The Klan literally is once more the embattled American farmer and artisan, coordinated into a disciplined and growing army, and launched upon a definite crusade for Americanism! . . . Thus the Klan goes back to the American racial instincts, and to the common sense which is their first product, as the basis of its beliefs and methods. . . . There are three of these great racial instincts, vital elements in both the historic and the present attempts to build an America which shall fulfill the aspirations and justify the heroism of the men who made the nation. These are the instincts of loyalty to the white race, to the traditions of America, and to the spirit of Protestantism, which has been an essential part of Americanism ever since the days of Roanoke and Plymouth Rock. They are condensed into the Klan slogan: "Native, white, Protestant supremacy." [From Hiram W. Evans, "The Klan's Fight for Americanism," North American Review 223 (March 1926):38-39.]   HIST 1025 Criteria Sec. I: Response to the question/ argument/ focus Sec I: Analysis of source/attention to visual & textual details/use of context Sec I: Organization/ Mechanics/ Presentation Sec. 2: Thesis/argument & thematic focus in response to the question Sec 2: Analysis of chosen sources, examples, evidence & use of context Grading Rubric for Exams 1 & 2 Dr. Phoebe Young A-level Effective thesis; complex and compelling discussion; original angles on question; cohesive Perceptive, convincing, insightful analysis; attention to concrete detail and context B-level Clear and sufficient thesis; cogent response to question; largely focused discussion Careful and direct analysis; mentions relevant details and context C-level Unclear or simplistic thesis; minimal response to question; inconsistent focus Analysis is cursory or confused; largely summary; reference to details and context is unspecific or vague D-level Thesis missing; lack of response to question; unfocused; nontopical Lacking in analysis or context; listing without making connections Effective, polished; fully proofed Logical; solid; minor errors Awkward; lapses; repeated errors Disorganized; hard to follow; major errors Effective thesis; complex and compelling discussion; original angles on question; cohesive Clear and sufficient thesis; cogent response to question; largely focused discussion Unclear or simplistic thesis; minimal response to question; inconsistent focus Thesis missing; lack of response to question; unfocused; nontopical Perceptive, convincing, insightful analysis; valuable selections; attention to concrete detail and connection to context Sec 2: Organization/ Effective, polished; fully Mechanics/ proofed Presentation Sec. 3: Effective thesis; complex and Thesis/argument & compelling discussion; original thematic focus angles on question; cohesive Careful and direct analysis; appropriate and relevant choices; mentions relevant details and draws on general context Logical; solid; minor errors Analysis is cursory or confused; largely summary; too few or unspecific examples; context is vague; reference to details and context is unspecific. Awkward; lapses; repeated errors Lacking in specific examples; analysis or context missing Clear and sufficient thesis; cogent response to question; largely focused discussion Unclear or simplistic thesis; minimal response to question; inconsistent focus Thesis missing; lack of response to question; unfocused; nontopical Sec 3: Analysis of examples/evidence & use of context Careful and direct analysis; appropriate and relevant choices; mentions relevant details and draws on general Analysis is cursory or confused; largely summary; too few or unspecific examples; context is vague; reference to details and context is unspecific. Awkward; lapses; repeated errors Lacking in specific examples; analysis or context missing Perceptive, convincing, insightful analysis; valuable selections; attention to concrete detail and connection to context Sec 3: Organization/ Effective, polished; fully Mechanics/ proofed Presentation Logical; solid; minor errors Disorganized; hard to follow; major errors Disorganized; hard to follow; major errors HIST 1025 Grading Rubric for Exams 1 & 2 Dr. Phoebe Young HIST 1025, F’19 Prof. Andrews Take Home Mid-Term Exam^ Instructions You have 1500 words—about five double-spaced pages—to answer three questions. Use your word processor’s “word count” tool so that you can keep track of your total. We will penalize you for exceeding the 1500-word limit with a 1-point deduction for every 20 words. This means that you must keep track of your total, revise your work as needed, and make every word count. We will not penalize you for coming in under the word limit; please note, though, that you will have a hard time answering all questions thoroughly in less than 1300-1400 words. Each section includes a suggested word count; these are guidelines, so if you write more in one section, you will have less room elsewhere. When you have finished the exam and are preparing to hand it in, you must calculate your total word count (not including citations and any numbers or titles that you use to identify your answers); type this word count at the top, underneath your name. Label each answer clearly using the question number and, when applicable, letter. Please doublespace, and use a 12-point font that is easy to read. Your completed exam must be submitted on Canvas as a .pdf. Your responses should show sound organization and clear logic. Your prose, meanwhile, should employ correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation, so proofreading is essential. Above all, take the time to insure that each answer possesses a clear thesis—a sustained argument that it supports using evidence and reasoning. We STRONGLY discourage you from pursuing web-based or other research, especially given space constraints. You should have more than enough to draw upon in the course materials. Successful answers keep the central focus on analysis of historical issues, chosen topic and relevant themes of the course rather than bringing in extraneous detail. Our intention is not to assess your ability to perform Google searches, but instead to examine the skill with which you can analyze and synthesize sources from this course. Analyzing outside sources almost always detracts from your ability to demonstrate these skills. ( If you elect to avoid this advice, see the last page of this guide for important instructions). For course materials, simple parenthetical citations are fine, i.e. (Foner, p. 132); (lecture, 3/19); (Chciago Times, Aug. 1, 1894, in Shannon and Bissell Brown, p. 86). Endnotes are fine so long as you use them correctly (see Citation Guide for proper format). Citations do NOT count against the word max; you may subtract them from your total. You do NOT need a Works Cited page. Plagiarism-checking software (turnitin.com) is enabled for this assignment, so be sure to avoid any inappropriate or unattributed use of sources, texts, websites, or others’ papers. This assignment is also subject to the honor code oath, and by uploading it to Canvas you affirm that: “On my honor as a University of Colorado Boulder student, I have neither given nor received unauthorized This exam format is drawn from and inspired by Professor Phoebe Young's masterful work on history pedagogy. This guide is reproduced and modified from those Prof. Young has developed for HIST 1025, with her gracious permission. ^ 1 assistance on this work.” The last page details what kinds of help are acceptable. It also explains how to access your turnitin.com report and offers advice on how to produce your best work (the goal that this assignment is designed to elicit). You must upload your completed exam in .pdf format to Canvas before Sunday, October 20th at 6 p.m. Late submissions will be penalized at the rate of 20% for the first 24-hour period after the date and time when the exam is due; starting at 6:01 p.m. on Monday, October 21st, your grade will receive a further 10% deduction for every 24-hour period in which it is late. 2 I. Primary source analysis (20%) Suggested length 275-325 words, about 1 page Choose ONE (either A or B but NOT both) A. Take a close look at this source, a 1903 cartoon from the magazine Judge. In lecture, I discussed immigration into the U.S. in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries using several concepts: a) the framework of pushes, pulls, and bridges; b) the common tendency of scholars and other experts since the early 1900s to differentiate between “old” and “new” immigrations; and c) the organization of nativist groups that pressured federal lawmakers to restrict immigration. Interpret the image by placing it in its historical context to answer the following question: What does this 1903 cartoon from Judge, a popular magazine, suggest about the thinking of those who supported federal restrictions on immigration? Your interpretation should combine evidence from the cartoon itself as well as lectures, Foner’s Story of American Freedom, and/or primary-source readings from Going to the Source and Canvas. (Note: If you decide to include sources produced after 1903, be careful to justify the connections you’re drawing between these and this Judge cartoon, which predated them. While Korematsu, for instance, can certainly shed light on this question, your essay would need to justify the use of 1940s evidence to understand an image created four decades earlier.) 3 B. In this illustration from the humor magazine Puck (April 6, 1901), the U.S. is represented as a young woman standing before a mirror and admiring the reflection of her hat. What does this image suggest regarding America's self-perception during its turn-of-the-century emergence as a major global power? What aspects of American power does the illustrator emphasize, and what aspects do they downplay or overlook? Interpret this image by placing it in historical context. Be sure to integrate specific details from the illustration with evidence drawn from course readings and lectures. You might want to consider the perspectives of Pullman strikers, members of the Blackfeet Nation, and/or African American leaders including Booker T. Washington and W.E.B. DuBois. 4 II. Making connections (40 pts.) Suggested length = 550-650 words, about 2 pages. In 1916, Randolph Bourne, a young social critic who was destined to die just in the Great Influenza Pandemic that erupted a few years later, reflected on democracy and identity in an article published in The Atlantic. Entitled "Trans-National America," Bourne's essay hinged on the following passage: "There is no distinctively American culture. It is apparently our lot rather to be a federation of cultures. This we have been for half a century, and the war has made it ever more evident that this is what we are destined to remain. ... What we have achieved has been rather a cosmopolitan federation of national colonies, of foreign cultures, from whom the sting of devastating competition has been removed. America is already the world-federation in miniature, the continent where for the first time in history has been achieved that miracle of hope, the peaceful living side by side, with character substantially preserved, of the most heterogeneous peoples under the sun. ... America is coming to be, not a nationality but a trans-nationality, a weaving back and forth, with the other lands, of many threads of all sizes and colors. Any movement which attempts to thwart this weaving, or to dye the fabric any one color, or disentangle the threads of the strands, is false to this cosmopolitan* vision." Write an analytical essay that answers this question: How accurate was Bourne's assessment at the time he was writing in 1916? How well did it hold up a quartercentury later? Did Bourne’s interpretation still hold water in the early 1940s, with the U.S. hurtling into World War II, or had the course of events since 1916 turned the U.S. into a less cosmopolitan, more definitively "American" nation and culture? Why or why not? Your answer needs to examine at least three primary sources—at least one from the 1880-1916 period, and at least one from the 1916-1945 era. These sources can be drawn from Going to the Source; from the additional primary-source readings posted on Canvas for weeks 1-7; or from the visual sources contained in Foner’s Story of American Freedom or in lecture slides. You can also use Foner or portions of Going to the Source authored by the editors, in which case you should should take care to cite them, but these readings are not primary sources, so you cannot use them to satisfy the primary-source requirement on this essay. Your response should develop a thesis that declares a particular focus or angle on the question. Be sure to seek clarification or permission from your TA if wish to use sources that may fall outside those included above. Be sure to explain why you want to use the source and to ask with ample time to receive an answer and adjust accordingly. If you’re unfamiliar with this term, follow this link and familiarize yourself with definitions 1 through 3: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cosmopolitan. * 5 III. Topical Essay (40 pts.) Suggested length = 550-650 words, about 2 pages. Answer ONE (1) of the following questions in an analytical, thesis-based essay that presents a clear response to the question, draws upon historical contexts learned in the course, and includes relevant and specific examples drawn from articles, sources, and lectures. You should incorporate at least three primary sources; at least two of these must be drawn from Going to the Source or posted Canvas readings. The others may come from lecture slides or Foner’s illustrations. Please take care not to mistake secondary sources for primary sources; the portions of Going to the Source written by the authors and lecture slides that include text written by me or other scholars do not count. a) Confirm, contradict, or complicate the following historical claim: "The story of the United States between 1865 and 1945 was a story of progress." Be sure to address at least THREE of the following: technology, federal power, economic growth, the distribution of wealth and income, and civil rights (especially for underrepresented groups including women and people of color). Take care to develop an argument that explains why you think that U.S. history over this period is best understood as a story of progress, of decline, or of a more complex mixture of the two. b) How might African Americans have responded to this poster in 1918? Explain how events and conditions in the years since Reconstruction might have influenced individuals’ decisions to enlist or not to enlist. c) Compare and contrast Abraham Lincoln's Second Inaugural Address with Franklin D. Roosevelt's First Inaugural Address. What do these documents reveal about how the nation had changed between 1864 and 1932? What continuities do they suggest? To what extent did FDR's address represent an advance beyond Lincoln's views, and to what extent did it suggest that the nation had failed to make progress in the wake of Lincoln's vision of a "new birth of freedom" (which he had laid out in 1863's Gettysburg Address)? d) Ponder the following historical claim: "More than any other factor, U.S. involvement in wars served to expand who could claim full citizenship in the U.S. between 1865 and 1945." Then write an essay that confirms, contradicts, or complicates this proposition. Your thesis should not simply describe the impact of warfare on citizenship, but should explain it. Be sure to address at least THREE of the following groups--workers, farmers, African Americans, Native Americans, Mexican Americans, Japanese Americans, 6 and Filipinos--as well at least FOUR of the following conflicts--the Civil War, the Indian Wars, the Spanish-American War and Filipino Insurrection, World War I, and World War II. A brief note: • Make sure you develop a clear thesis/argument in response to the question, even if you see complex and nuanced positions for each side. Even if you argue that a bit of both sides are at play, decide which do you think was more influential, and discuss the relative balance between them. In all answers be sure to explain how you see historical factors at work in the issue and why the evidence you’ve chosen is key to your answer/argument. And finally: • Handouts available on Canvas can assist you in producing your best work: Three Tests for a Good Thesis, Grading Rubric, Citation Guide • Your exam as a whole should demonstrate breadth and avoid repetition of focus or central sources, so strategize your answers accordingly. There are of course relationships between the various themes, which can be beneficial to mention briefly, but a little thinking ahead will help to ensure you are not essentially rehashing the same answer in response to different questions. • We encourage you to seek help from your TA, professors, tutors, and classmates at two key stages of work: a) in strategizing or talking through possible answers, thesis statements, or analytical approaches and, b) in revising and proofreading a draft. Do not allow others to compose your work for you or define your answers in full—that would constitute a violation of the honor code. Rather, seek feedback about your original thoughts and written work. Such a move is not only acceptable, but also a regular habit of good students and scholars and one we’d like to promote. In fact, we encourage you to build in time to write a first draft, have someone read it and offer you feedback (perhaps by exchanging it with a partner), then talk through the “three tests for a good thesis” and other grading criteria in relation to your answers. Past experience shows that this method will help you produce your best work. • You are able to view your own “originality report” from the turnitin.com system. We enable this function in case you’d like to use it as part of your revision process. You can upload a draft before the assignment is due, check the originality report, and make necessary or productive revisions before re-submitting your exam before the due date (the new file will overwrite the old one). This is the process: some time after uploading your file (turnitin can take minutes or, sometimes, hours, to generate a report on your exam), go back to the main Dropbox folders page and click on the View History button at the top; this will list your submitted files with a column to the right for Reports. Click on the colored bar with the percentage to access the report and see sections identified as copied and where they derive from: a website, a published source, or other student papers. Quotations come up frequently, and if what shows as copied is a quotation that you have correctly cited then don’t worry about it. If you have either not correctly cited it, inadvertently copied or paraphrased too closely without citing, or somehow generated text that appears to have been copied from an outside source, make note of it, then fix the problem(s) before resubmitting. • Web-based sources are the MOST common way students get themselves into plagiarism trouble; it seems that such sources tempt students to knowingly or accidentally 7 re-use too much from such sources. So, I urge you just to avoid the situation entirely and use your time more productively by focusing on course materials alone. If you feel the need to look around, or to help you gain a different perspective on your sources, apply the following best practices when using the web: o Use common sense as to which sources may be more reliable than others. Bookrags.com or freepapers.net should look suspicious; Smithsonian.org or historymatters.gmu.edu should suggest reliability (although they don’t guarantee it). Wikipedia can offer some basic facts and background or prompt further inquiry (always check an article’s references) but it should not serve as an authority for quoting or citing (same goes for encyclopedias or dictionaries generally). If you aren’t clear or are curious why, ask us. o If you feel you must include a web-based source in your text, unlike course materials, you MUST use endnotes with full citations for each website referenced. This involves more than simply copying the http://address - see Citation Guide for proper format. • Please upload your exam as a SINGLE file (not three separate ones) and make sure to format it as a .pdf. Please note that many file types, such as the one produced by Apple Pages, are NOT readable on Canvas. They will not be graded; worse, they will not qualify as having been submitted. Only .pdf formatted responses! 8
Purchase answer to see full attachment